Scientists "see" Ghosts

Annie`s statement is correct, plus,.... Our mind isn`t alwas playing those tricks when we capture something on film or video. Plus there`s the ectoplasmic substance in the air that helps ghosts actually appear. This ecto is very strong in the dark, but extremely weak in the light.

I don`t have a problem with anyone that tries to debunk something, but all to often we see the scientific community make bad conclusions from their research & they dont properly apply it to every possibility.

That's a good example of matrixing and how it also applies to sound and smell. Have you ever had a fan going in the summer to take the edge off of the heat? Ever hear what sounds like a whisper or a low chatter while that fan is on? How about smelling a few scents compbined? Two or three different scents combined might make one think the odor is something completely different.

Funny you mention that...I have to run a small fan at night for background noise or I can't sleep. I've noticed on a few occasions that it sounds like people whispering. I always kind of just guessed it was the fan because it's always very faint and unintelligible and I only notice it at night in my bedroom with the fan going.

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer

Annie`s statement is correct, plus,.... Our mind isn`t alwas playing those tricks when we capture something on film or video. Plus there`s the ectoplasmic substance in the air that helps ghosts actually appear. This ecto is very strong in the dark, but extremely weak in the light.

I don`t have a problem with anyone that tries to debunk something, but all to often we see the scientific community make bad conclusions from their research & they dont properly apply it to every possibility.

But bad light plays tricks with video or film as much as it does with our eyes; in fact, it produces just the ambiguous images the initial post mentions. Your precise knowledge regarding ectoplasm surprises me - is there a sample somewhere that has been studied?

I have always wondered why ghosthunts are nearly always done in the dark. I've never seen the logic in it, why would ghosts care about light? Indeed, I've always understood that ghosts detract energy from their surroundings in order to manifest themselves (therefore the mysterious 'cold spots'). As lightsources have ample energy I would therefore expect ghosts to manifest themselves in well-lit rather than dark surroundings.

I am especially surprised to find that, in all of the many TV shows of this genre at least, people turn off all the lights, but then use flashlights to find their way around. So a certain amount of light is OK. Why? To me the explanation has always seemed obvious: because this creates the ideal circumstances for our senses to play tricks on us.

(And with regard to apparent movement: I vividly remember a class in college about the suggestibility of our senses. The teacher darkened the classroom and switched on a small red light he said he was holding in his hand. "I'm now walking to the right," he said, and indeed the light moved to the right. "Now to the left," and again the light moved in that direction. Then he switched on the room lights again and it turned out the little red lamp had been stationary on his desk all the time. In bad lighting conditions and when there is a lack of reference points it is easy to perceive movement where there is none).

theres no doubt that bad lighting or lack of lighting can play with your mind and make you think you see things you in fact,dont.i have no doubt thats why the tv ghost hunters turn the lights off,added drama.its a tv show,regardless what tv show it is the 1st objective is ratings.you cant get em youre off the air.it might make some degree of sense to have as little light as possible,seeing as the most popular belief is that these beings are made of energy,if that is indeed the case it might be easier to see them or the light their energy gives off with as little light as possible.of course the flash light is to give you vision.searching in pitchblack would be ill advised regardless of if it gets results or not.think of it like this:maybe its like watching a meteor shower,or the stars in general even.what youre seeing is not the things themself but the light (energy)they give off.my family lives in a small desert town and when i go see them and look up at the night sky its hard to believe its the same one that hangs over LA.the difference:way more light in bigger cities.less light you produce,the more clearly you can see whats going on with the light coming from another source.this is not my conclusive opinion,just a suggestion to believers and skeptics alike,instead of viewing it in black and white and arguing why lights off is or is not pointless,think of it from every perspective.the one i offered,if ghosts do exist and are in fact energy,makes sense.doesnt mean its right just a way to look at it.

"And with regard to apparent movement: I vividly remember a class in college about the suggestibility of our senses. The teacher darkened the classroom and switched on a small red light he said he was holding in his hand. "I'm now walking to the right," he said, and indeed the light moved to the right. "Now to the left," and again the light moved in that direction. Then he switched on the room lights again and it turned out the little red lamp had been stationary on his desk all the time. In bad lighting conditions and when there is a lack of reference points it is easy to perceive movement where there is none"

a highschool teacher did something insanely similar to this but with a lazer pointer on the white board.i have to admit i thought it was staying still the whole time(not to say im immune to suggestibility,maybe i suggested to myself that he was a prankster and a chucklehead and so i didnt see movement because of that).this is,however,an excellent example of how most,if not all movements in a poorly lit area could be explained.especially if the people are looking for something like this.it gets weirder though when the lighting isnt so poor,or even if it is still poor, and a group of people see the same thing move whens ghosts was far from any of their minds.
the only problem i have with this is that many people will apply the same logic to why someone sees something move in front of their very eyes in a brightly lit room when they arent in a place they assume to be haunted.to me its ridiculous to apply bad lighting playing tricks on your mind while youre seeing what you want to see due to suggestibilty,to a scenario where someone is seeing something in a bright room in a place they do not believe previously to be haunted.excerpt from a conversation that i heard in real life after someone who is a hardcore skeptic (and a friend) saw a chair wobble and fall down in my old kitchen,seemingly of its own accord "i dont believe in ghosts,but i was over at tommys it was 1pm with the lights on and i heard something in the kitchen.i went in there and one of the chairs was wobbling violently,after a few seconds it tipped over.no one else was in the room and i have no clue how that could have happened.im not saying it was a ghost,or anything else but it scared the s**t out of me and i left the room"said the friend who is still a skeptic to this day but is far more open to the possibility of such things.
other skeptic replied,"well you were over at tommys where tons of 'things' supposedly happen(not true by the way this was the 2nd thing that ever happened in that house and the 1st thing certainly didnt weigh a ton on its own)your mind was more open to the idea that things could happen there and so youre more likely to see something be it ghost or not.to see something move in the dark is interesting but its a far cry from saying a place is haunted"

ok,while everything the 2nd guy said was fact(aside from claiming that i made tons of claims within that house when a)only one other weird thing had ever happened there and B)i never suggested it was a ghost)it did not apply to what it was meant to respond at ALL.
1.neither of us were under the idea that a ghost was in this house.period.suggestibility is out the window on this one.
2.no one said the place was haunted.
3.bad lighting was not a factor.
4.the only person to experience this was alone skeptic,i had no influence.
5.the guys mind wasnt open at all to the idea that ghosts could even logically exist,he was dead set on the fact that my house,nor any other,is was or ever would be haunted.

my only problem is to a lot of skeptics,proof or alternative viewpoints on one instance is proof/alternative viewpoints on supernatural period. its like saying someone who was in a murder trial was guilty because the last guilty guy had the same tendencies.its unjust and lazy. while i have seen,and mind you written off many things in the dark,it doesnt mean i can apply the same facts to entirely different scenarios